The goal of both federal and local employment laws is to help provide a workplace that is free from any form of discrimination. Tayeb Hyderally is an expert at employment law who specializes in educating a wide variety of audiences on how to keep the workplace free of discriminatory practices. He works to educate both employees and employers about the various aspects of employment law. He works with corporate officials in the development of policies which are in place to protect both the company as well as the workers. In order to be aware of the current trend in employment law, Mr. Hyderally reviews many different employment law cases. This case is one in which the EEOC sues a hospital owned day care for disability discrimination. Even health care facilities must be able to comply with ADA and any local laws as well as be capable of providing any accommodations that might be necessary. Continue Reading

There may be many reasons for an employer to terminate an employee. Many times this is a legitimate action based upon some form of misconduct. However, when there is no reason given for the termination it opens the company up for scrutiny and legal experts such as Tayeb Hyderally may begin to question the ultimate reasons for the actions. Many times as in the case with Mr. Velez, there is reason to believe that there discriminatory practices had occurred on the part of the company. Experts in employment law may have a relatively easy case when the company either does not have proper procedures in place; or does not follow them. Puerto Rican employer, Thermo King de Puerto Rico, Inc learned this the hard way. Continue Reading

The EEOC is in existence to enforce federal laws which prohibit discrimination in the workplace. When an employee feels that a discriminatory act has occurred, they can file a complaint with the EEOC. It is also wise to seek council with an attorney who is an expert at employment law. Many times in cases of workplace discrimination a case is not sought because the individual does not recognize the act as discriminatory. It is very important for those who suspect this type of illegitimate activity on the behalf of an employer to seek council from experts such as Tayeb Hyderally. Such is the case involving a worker who was terminated once she asked for time off to have a life saving surgery.

The EEOC Claim

There are not too many cases in which a heart condition can be considered a disability which is covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act. (ADA) However, in New Hampshire the EEOC did charge a Nashua company under the ADA. The company terminated Nancy Hajjar because of her heart condition. Windmill International, Inc. terminated Ms. Hajjar one week after she requested time off for a heart procedure which would clear her clogged arteries and she stated she may possibly need heart surgery as well. According to the EEOC, this was potentially a life-threatening impairment. Continue Reading

The world of employment law can be rather complex, especially when it comes to defining terms as it relates to disability and discrimination. One area that expert lawyers such as Ty Hyderally must correctly interpret is what makes reasonable accommodation. What makes this so difficult to determine is that what might be a reasonable accommodation for one, would not work for another; this means it is determined on a case by case basis which can be complicated. Those interested in employment law have their eyes on a case which involves reasonable accommodations and whether or not a location transfer meets the criteria.

Sanchez vs. Vilsak

Ms. Sanchez is employed by the United States Forest Service. After falling at work she suffered irreversible brain damage which affects her vision. She totally lost the left side in her field of vision. The Tenth Circuit appellate court is set to determine if her employer must consider it a reasonable accommodation to transfer her to another location. Under the Rehabilitation Act the court found that it is a reasonable accommodation to ask for a transfer so that she can receive adequate medical treatment and care.

Sanchez’s Request for Transfer

In this disability discrimination case, Clarice Sanchez did request a transfer so that she could be in a location which is closer to a medical facility. The facility provides her treatment for the lost field of vision due to the work place accident. The employer denied her request for a transfer and they asserted that according to the federal disability discrimination laws they are not required to grant such a transfer to an employee only for the purpose of receiving medical treatment. They also asserted that Sanchez was able to “correct” her vision impairment by just “turning her head.” Continue Reading

The courts are still attempting to determine the boundaries as they are set forth in disability discrimination cases. The EEOC is in place to enforce laws which make it illegal to discriminate against an individual in the workplace based on a disability. The trouble seems to be determining what a “disability” really is. It must be a condition which substantially limits at least one major life activity. Employment law experts can help individuals decipher the guidelines as they are laid out by the ADA. Discrimination of workers based on limiting disabilities is illegal in the workplace. Tayeb Hyderally is an expert at employment law and keeps up on cases which pertain to employment law as it relates to disability discrimination.

EEOC vs. Cottonwood Financial Ltd

The EEOC filed a case against Cottonwood Financial stating that they erroneously terminated store manager Sean Reilly. The company allegedly fired him because they thought he was too disabled to work because he has bipolar disorder. Reilly was under the care of a physician and was actively working to control his disability while attending school and attempting to secure employment. He had been an honor student when he was in high school and had begun attending college in Portland, Oregon while on a scholarship based on academic excellence. While he was in college he was diagnosed as having bipolar disorder. His symptoms worsened and he was forced to withdraw from school at which time he returned to Texas and began working at The Cash Store in Cottonwood, Texas. Continue Reading

Tayeb Hyderally is an expert in employment law and has many years of successful litigation. He is adamant about helping keep workers safe from discriminatory practices. Ty Hyderally understands the many facets of employment law and works to educate personnel on how to keep the workplace safe by breaking down laws pertaining to discriminatory practices. As part of his work in the field of employment law, he also helps businesses and employers understand areas such as ADEA, Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The ADEA prohibits discriminatory actions against employees and applicants who are over 40 years of age. Employers cannot harass, fail to hire, layoff, terminate or fail to promote or in any other way discriminate against individuals who are over 40 years old based on their age.

EEOC VS Red Rock Western Jeep Tours

Gloria Rose was hired as a reservationist at Red Rock Western Jeep Tours located in Sedona, Arizona. Ms. Rose was hired and instructed to return her “new hire” packet which had different types of employment related forms such as direct deposit forms, and tax forms. When she brought the completed forms back the next day, she was met by a supervisor who asked her several more questions as well as for her age. Ms. Rose stated that she was 75 years of age. There was no communication from the company for several days after that conversation and when Ms. Rose sent an e-mail to the company asking when her start date would occur she received a response which stated that the supervisor and the general manager did not feel that Ms. Rose was the “right person” for the position. She promptly responded with an inquiry as to how they made this type of determination without seeing her work ethic. She also informed Red Rock that she felt she was being discriminated against based on her age.

After supervisors at Red Rock received this email they hired Ms. Rose but then terminated her after only 2 days. According to the EEOC, Ms. Rose never received training during these 2 days but instead was sent on several jeep tours which took up several hours. Once Rose was terminated, the EEOC alleged that Red Rock filled Ms. Rose’s position with substantially younger individuals.

Red Rock Western Jeep Tours Settlement

The suit against Red Rock did not go to court but reached an out of court settlement. The company was ordered by consent decree to pay Ms. Rose $35,000 to settle the lawsuit. In addition, Red Rock was mandated to adopt an adequate anti-discrimination policy and to provide training regarding avoiding discrimination for all of its employees who are involved in the process of hiring. Red Rock Western Jeep was also instructed to refrain from engaging in any further age discrimination or forms of retaliation.

According to the ADEA (Age Discrimination in Employment Act) employers are prohibited from discriminating against employees who are 40 years of age or older. Employers cannot harass, fail to hire or promote, layoff, terminate or discriminate in any other way against workers who are over 40 because of their age.

There are employment laws in place which are meant to prevent discriminatory practices in the workplace. Expert lawyers such as Tayeb Hyderally work with many different organizations to ensure that employees and employers are aware of the laws that were enacted to protect workers. Ty Hyderally travels extensively working with a wide variety of organizations, PR personnel and businesses to inform them how to maintain a workplace that remains free from discrimination. As an expert in employment law, he also provides information on what to do if you believe a discriminatory act has occurred in the workplace. Mr. Hyderally also informs staff members about how to identify and protect themselves from retaliation in cases where discrimination is reported. Of all the places we would think would be free from discriminatory practices religious organizations seem to be one of the most likely. However, in this case we find that a religious organization can also engage in age discrimination similarly to other employers.

TBN

Horst Brandt VS Trinity Broadcasting Network

Horst Brandt was in charge of TBN’s computer systems. He was hired as an independent contractor instead of a regular employee although he worked full time for the religious organization. This was reportedly a less expensive way for TBN to keep Brandt on board. However, there were many slurs about Brandt’s German heritage and discriminatory remarks made about his age. It was alleged that there were statements made such as, “Horst runs his department like Nazi Germany during World War II.”

Filing the Age Discrimination Suit

Brandt filed a claim against TBN which stated he had been discriminated against based on his age. He was subjected to repeated remarks about their “older workers.” In the meeting where Brandt found out about his termination Crouch Jr. stated that “Paul Crouch, Sr. and Ruth Brown are getting up there in age too.” After terminating Horst Brandt, Crouch Jr. reportedly told a vendor that “there are some older people here and it is time for a change.” He also stated that Ruth Brown who was TBN’s Chief Financial Officer was “getting up there in age and should find something else to do.” The building that Brandt worked in was frequently referred to as the “old folk’s home” and Brandt was often referred to as “an old dinosaur.”

More Problems for TBN

It is also alleged that TBN’s senior officials told Brittany Koper to implement “alternative reforms.” Brittany Koper was head of the human resources at TBN and her grandfather, Paul Crouch Sr. is the founder and CEO of TBN. Crouch allegedly told Koper to update the age report on TBN’s workers. She was then instructed to fire anyone over 65 years old because there were “too old, too sick and too lazy.” Crouch Sr. began a campaign to move older workers to part time employment and tried to force some into retirement. Anyone over 80 were placed automatically at a part-time status.

The Future

Brandt and TBN reached a settlement agreement in court. However, due to the nature and saturation of alleged age discrimination it appears that there could possibly be a class action lawsuit against the religious employer in the near future.